|
|
Post by drbill on May 17, 2021 16:23:24 GMT -6
Bend those numbers however you like.  They are numbers and you can make em say what you want if you're smarter than the next guy, or that guy doesn't have the time to bend em back the other way. What's good for the goose is good for the gander as grandma used to say. VAERS is pretty clear at this point. Death WITH Vaccine, or Death BY Vaccine (this week)......VS......Death WITH Covid, or Death BY Covid (last year). Both sides working it pretty hard this week aren't they? But if you're honest, it works both ways doesn't it. You can't flip the rules. Well, you can if you have an agenda, then by all means, bend the $#!@ out of those numbers to suit your personal - company - political narrative!! The media certainly is. What's an example of a "bent" number here? I gave you two examples above. Both open to opposite interpretations by guys MUCH smarter than me. Both in heated debate. 1. Death WITH Vaccine, or Death BY Vaccine. Choose how you want to bend those numbers. Those numbers can be skewed to make opposite points, no? VAERS numbers on the official CDC site showing roughly 4000 deaths. I'm well aware of the shortcomings of VAERS. But we are EARLY in the study of the Disease, and even earlier in the study of the Vaccine. Some take VAERS at it's word, or even a percentage if being generous. Others like yourself say "0" deaths directly linked to Vaccine. Who's right, who's wrong. Prove it. Which side were you on when the inflated Covid deaths (ala death BY C19 with car accident victims and gunshot victims who tested positive and were declared death BY C19) were hitting the news every hour and the "rules" of number / statistics were flipped? Numbers CAN be a game of science in the eye of the beholder. It really boils down to biases and motives. Both of which were pretty clear to me in the video I linked of the swine flu investigation. |
|
|
|
Post by ehrenebbage on May 17, 2021 16:29:31 GMT -6
I'm finding it hard to follow the various arguments against Matt's position.
Is COVID a non-issue that hasn't actually killed anyone you know?
Is it a deadly virus created in a lab by Fauci and the Chinese?
Is it a collaboration between all of big pharma, most of the world's governments, the majority of the scientific community, and the majority of the world's media, meant to gain control of the population?
Should we trust the vague numbers provided by a vet and a vitamin salesman, but not the numbers that have been scrutinized and peer-reviewed by the world's leading experts?
Has it been blown wildly out of proportion by the liberal media? Or is it truly a pandemic, and Trump is a hero for pushing big pharma to develop a vaccine in record time to save all of our lives?
If Trump is a hero, is he also a villain for being in bed with the CDC and big pharma?
Was the vaccine designed to work for everybody but the Yankees?
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 17, 2021 16:34:18 GMT -6
Was the vaccine designed to work for everybody but the Yankees? I heard the Yanks got their Vaccines from the Red Sox team doctor!!! |
|
|
|
Post by ehrenebbage on May 17, 2021 16:39:26 GMT -6
Was the vaccine designed to work for everybody but the Yankees? I heard the Yanks got their Vaccines from the Red Sox team doctor!!! HAHAHA!!!! Now it's all starting to make sense. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 17, 2021 16:39:28 GMT -6
What's an example of a "bent" number here? I gave you two examples above. Both open to opposite interpretations by guys MUCH smarter than me. Both in heated debate. 1. Death WITH Vaccine, or Death BY Vaccine. Choose how you want to bend those numbers. Those numbers can be skewed to make opposite points, no? VAERS numbers on the official CDC site showing roughly 4000 deaths. I'm well aware of the shortcomings of VAERS. But we are EARLY in the study of the Disease, and even earlier in the study of the Vaccine. Some take VAERS at it's word, or even a percentage if being generous. Others like yourself say "0" deaths directly linked to Vaccine. Who's right, who's wrong. Prove it. Where were you when the inflated Covid deaths were hitting the news every hour and the "rules" of number / statistics were flipped? Numbers CAN be a game of science in the eye of the beholder. It really boils down to biases and motives. Both of which were pretty clear to me in the video I linked of the swine flu investigation. Note that I'm not saying that it is the unimpeachable, ultimate truth that vaccine-linked deaths = 0. Because that is simply impossible to know. It's also impossible to know that no one has died from blowing up too many consecutive balloons or taking too much Horny Goat Weed from the minimart. Prove of a negative is...mighty hard to come by. But when someone who was vaccinated, and then later dies, has an autopsy done and their med records and death cert examined and the people doing the investigation conclude that it's not linked to vaccination, that's a thing. It's a piece of data. It's not "bending" that data to say "we haven't established a link to vaccination in any of these deaths", it's just the truth. It doesn't mean our system is omniscient or something, but it is correct and true to say that deaths directly linked to the vaccine = 0. That is what our data, at this moment, honestly tells us. It's not "proof", it's just data, just evidence. Where is the evidence, data, proof, anything really, for the idea that "they're lying, there is a vaccine connection to these deaths" or the softer version, "I think they've just missed it"? Neither of these claims have "proven" anything, but one has a pile of evidence behind it and one has, as best as I can tell, not much of anything other than philosophically/ideologically based suspicion. As for the more generalized stuff about "the news" or "the media", I don't really have a way to respond to that because I don't know what you're specifically talking about. |
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on May 17, 2021 16:41:17 GMT -6
I don't think there has been enough time to throughly investigate all of those claims yet. The number of reports is so much higher than the typical flu vaccine reports for example that it at least has to be pretty concerning. We'll see how it all pans out. There are certainly some things(for example the virus origin) that when given enough time, are completely changing. What are you basing this enough time on? How long do they usually take? I have no idea. I looked at VAERS website and it says that the CDC and FDA individually review all serious reports. VAERS is jointly operated with the FDA and other groups like the DoD and the VA, as well as local groups. VAERS also says that healthcare providers are required by law to report adverse events. And anyone can report anything, even if they don't know if the vaccine caused it. Here's the CDC following up on the first month of 13 million doses. No deaths linked to vaccines. www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7008e3.htmYou can read the January report here to see if you think they're taking it seriously enough. www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-01/06-COVID-Shimabukuro.pdfBy comparison to the Swine Flu example, we've given about 6 times as many doses and the program has been running for 6 months. The 1976 was halted after ten weeks. Do you think there is more or less scrutiny on this? Where is the evidence of negative outcomes? |
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on May 17, 2021 16:53:46 GMT -6
yes. I agree. And that is exactly how they are reported. Here's a good article that goes over a lot of the confusion. www.aamc.org/news-insights/how-are-covid-19-deaths-counted-it-s-complicatedHow about another way to look at it. There were around 600,000 excess deaths in the US last year, around 80% of which were directly associated with COVID. Meaning there were 1600 deaths per day in addition to our normal 7000 deaths. Fatality of COVID19 is hugely different by age, but given the US age demographic mix, the total rate would be somewhere around 0.5% of people who got it died. So you could estimate perhaps 120,000,000 people got it. If every single one of those VAERS reports is true, it's still a couple hundred times less deadly than COVID. www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7015a4.htm |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 17, 2021 17:01:31 GMT -6
yes. I agree. And that is exactly how they are reported. Not true Matt. I'll drop it there. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 17, 2021 17:09:26 GMT -6
Why "drop it"? I don't understand the darting in and out with various claims. Surely if you've been convinced to hold a position, there is a reason for it. And if it's a sturdy reason, why be sheepish about sharing it? If it was good enough to convince you, maybe it'll be good enough to convince some of the rest of us.
The furtive dance with throwing claims out and then backing away from them makes it feel like you're not sure exactly why you're holding a given position. I doubt that's really the case, so what gives?
|
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on May 17, 2021 17:21:14 GMT -6
The alternative is that millions of doctors are either intentionally filling out the forms wrong (which is a felony in many cases) or are too inept to fill them out correctly. Or we could assume that most doctors filling out death certificates generally know what they’re doing and are generally filling them out honestly and correctly.
Either way it is the same doctors filling out the death certificates in either case.
|
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 17, 2021 17:32:01 GMT -6
Cause this is a pretty peaceful place overall, and I see no reason to dump 5 gallons of gas and an acetylene torch to this thread. There doesn't need to be a conspiracy of "millions" of doctors to know that greed, and bias are always in play. I have family working at hospital's and I'll just happily drop it at that. You can either choose to read between the lines or not. Matt - you're a good guy- but you are not God and you're not 100% right 100% of the time. And with that I will most certainly drop it. |
|
|
|
Post by seawell on May 17, 2021 17:39:53 GMT -6
I don't think there has been enough time to throughly investigate all of those claims yet. The number of reports is so much higher than the typical flu vaccine reports for example that it at least has to be pretty concerning. We'll see how it all pans out. There are certainly some things(for example the virus origin) that when given enough time, are completely changing. What are you basing this enough time on? How long do they usually take? I have no idea. I looked at VAERS website and it says that the CDC and FDA individually review all serious reports. VAERS is jointly operated with the FDA and other groups like the DoD and the VA, as well as local groups. VAERS also says that healthcare providers are required by law to report adverse events. And anyone can report anything, even if they don't know if the vaccine caused it. Here's the CDC following up on the first month of 13 million doses. No deaths linked to vaccines. www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7008e3.htmYou can read the January report here to see if you think they're taking it seriously enough. www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-01/06-COVID-Shimabukuro.pdfBy comparison to the Swine Flu example, we've given about 6 times as many doses and the program has been running for 6 months. The 1976 was halted after ten weeks. Do you think there is more or less scrutiny on this? Where is the evidence of negative outcomes? I'm basing it off the fact that the number is growing at an unusually high rate(when compared to other VAERS numbers for the flu vaccine over the past 5 years for example). So it's an ongoing situation that continually needs to be monitored. I'm of the mindset they haven't linked any deaths to the covid vaccine *yet.*. I tend to think where there's that much smoke there's fire but we'll see. I'm not saying they should stop the covid vaccine by the way, I was just surprised they suspended the 1976 vaccine for such low numbers. So for me, when you put the covid vaccine VAERS reports along with the fact that this is the quickest a vaccine has been brought to market...and....it is the first time a MRNA vaccine has been given to humans, I'm concerned. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 17, 2021 17:42:32 GMT -6
Cause this is a pretty peaceful place overall, and I see no reason to dump 5 gallons of gas and an acetylene torch to this thread. There doesn't need to be a conspiracy of "millions" of doctors to know that greed, and bias are always in play. I have family working at hospital's and I'll just happily drop it at that. You can either choose to read between the lines or not. Matt - you're a good guy- but you are not God and you're not 100% right 100% of the time. And with that I will most certainly drop it. Ok, that's fine. I guess I'd just say either participate in the discussion or don't, ya know? Posting claims and links that you have to later distance from (or generalize into obscurity) just feels like a strange approach to me. Also, as is obviously the case, "either there's a conspiracy of millions of doctors or greed and bias exist" is the falsest of dichotomies. |
|
|
|
Post by Tbone81 on May 17, 2021 17:46:27 GMT -6
The alternative is that millions of doctors are either intentionally filling out the forms wrong (which is a felony in many cases) or are too inept to fill them out correctly. Or we could assume that most doctors filling out death certificates generally know what they’re doing and are generally filling them out honestly and correctly. Either way it is the same doctors filling out the death certificates in either case. Doctors are told by the health department how to fill out death certificates. Maybe not individually, but they’re told how to label these deaths. I’m talking bout COVID deaths, not anything vaccine related. And they’ve essentially been told to label all people dying with COVID as dying from COVID. They’re also instructed to list people tested negative but are “presumed to have had COVID” (because of lack of a better known cause) to be listed as a COVID death. So basically all the numbers are wrong. All of them. Deaths, cases, transmission rate. Etc etc Wrong by how much? Wrong in which direction? Who knows, but the fundamental testing (PCR) is a horrible diagnostic tool. And add to that some equally horrible accounting of “the numbers” by the health Dept, cdc, WHO etc and we’re not looking at a very accurate tree picture of anything. So in the end we all believe what we want to believe, me included. |
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 17, 2021 17:49:11 GMT -6
What are you basing this enough time on? How long do they usually take? I have no idea. I looked at VAERS website and it says that the CDC and FDA individually review all serious reports. VAERS is jointly operated with the FDA and other groups like the DoD and the VA, as well as local groups. VAERS also says that healthcare providers are required by law to report adverse events. And anyone can report anything, even if they don't know if the vaccine caused it. Here's the CDC following up on the first month of 13 million doses. No deaths linked to vaccines. www.cdc.gov/mmwr/volumes/70/wr/mm7008e3.htmYou can read the January report here to see if you think they're taking it seriously enough. www.cdc.gov/vaccines/acip/meetings/downloads/slides-2021-01/06-COVID-Shimabukuro.pdfBy comparison to the Swine Flu example, we've given about 6 times as many doses and the program has been running for 6 months. The 1976 was halted after ten weeks. Do you think there is more or less scrutiny on this? Where is the evidence of negative outcomes? I'm basing it off the fact that the number is growing at an unusually high rate(when compared to other VAERS numbers for the flu vaccine over the past 5 years for example). So it's an ongoing situation that continually needs to be monitored. I'm of the mindset they haven't linked any deaths to the covid vaccine *yet.*. I tend to think where there's that much smoke there's fire but we'll see. I'm not saying they should stop the covid vaccine by the way, I was just surprised they suspended the 1976 vaccine for such low numbers. So for me, when you put the covid vaccine VAERS reports along with the fact that this is the quickest a vaccine has been brought to market...and....it is the first time a MRNA vaccine has been given to humans, I'm concerned. How much smoke is ~4,000/259,000,000 = 0.000017 indicative of in your view? Again, you're comparing the 1976 number of directly linked deaths to the current ~4,000 non-linked deaths. To compare the same stat from 1976 to now, you have the 53 (or whatever it was) directly linked deaths then compared to 0 directly-linked deaths now. If there were 50+ directly linked deaths to this vaccine it would absolutely be suspended. Or put another way, to compare to the ~4,000 today, you'd need to go dig up how many people died after getting the 1976 vaccine but the investigation determined it had nothing to do with the vaccine (and adjust for how many doses had been administered in each program of course). |
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on May 17, 2021 17:56:48 GMT -6
As far as I know I’ve never claimed to be God or omniscient or even an expert. You’re free to disagree with me and that doesn’t make you wrong. I’m not always right, but I do try my hardest to be objective and source my information.
The only reason I know anything about this because the past year I had to lead our COVID team at the day job. So I get these questions all the time, and I’ve had to dig into things to prepare reports. We have 1,500 employees in the region. I’ve heard it all at this point.
There is so much bad information out there and most people don’t have the time to sift the good from bad.
Someone says a vaccine monitoring system has 4000 covid deaths on Facebook and the next thing you know people are concerned. They don’t consider for example that we vaccinated a very different age profile of people than we do with flu (starting from the oldest down) or that perhaps this is more high profile, or better monitored, or more participated in on average.
What’s the ratio of severe to non severe reports for this vs a flu shot? What’s the rate of participation? We just get numbers with no context. No one has time to prove the negative or answer every objection. You can’t prove that there’s no conspiracy, you can’t prove the numbers aren’t corrupt for falsified by greed. It’s not possible or feasible.
What I don’t really appreciate is being low key insulted for no apparent reason. We’re my links offensive or something? I read y’all’s and respond with info and thoughts. I don’t get it. If you want me to shut up, just say so. Ive got plenty of other things to do.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on May 17, 2021 18:03:02 GMT -6
The alternative is that millions of doctors are either intentionally filling out the forms wrong (which is a felony in many cases) or are too inept to fill them out correctly. Or we could assume that most doctors filling out death certificates generally know what they’re doing and are generally filling them out honestly and correctly. Either way it is the same doctors filling out the death certificates in either case. Doctors are told by the health department how to fill out death certificates. Maybe not individually, but they’re told how to label these deaths. I’m talking bout COVID deaths, not anything vaccine related. And they’ve essentially been told to label all people dying with COVID as dying from COVID. They’re also instructed to list people tested negative but are “presumed to have had COVID” (because of lack of a better known cause) to be listed as a COVID death. So basically all the numbers are wrong. All of them. Deaths, cases, transmission rate. Etc etc Wrong by how much? Wrong in which direction? Who knows, but the fundamental testing (PCR) is a horrible diagnostic tool. And add to that some equally horrible accounting of “the numbers” by the health Dept, cdc, WHO etc and we’re not looking at a very accurate tree picture of anything. So in the end we all believe what we want to believe, me included. When this question first came up after Dr Birx’ comment I took the time to answer some of our employees questions on it. I talked to a couple of doctors. I also read the CDC reporting guidelines on the topic. www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvss/vsrg/vsrg03-508.pdfI don’t know about individual local health departments, but what you’re saying is not reflected in the CDC guidance. |
|
|
|
Post by drbill on May 17, 2021 19:03:53 GMT -6
What I don’t really appreciate is being low key insulted for no apparent reason. None of us do Matt. Not you, not me. I'm sure if we had the conversation in person, things would be quite different and conversation would flow more freely and equitably. From my perspective (and I'll admit my perception may be flawed), you seem unable to even consider an alternative to the research you've done. As is evident in your "millions of doctors conspiracy" comment earlier. Only to be countered by Tbone81 who actually works with Covid patients - who flat out says that your perception of what is going on is dead wrong. At least that's how I read it. None of us are 100% aware of all facts Matt. But I do have relatives working in hospitals as well, and can back up much of Tbone's comments with what they have told me. All of which is 100% unverifiable of course. no studies. Only hearsay. So you'll have to either call us liars, or ignorant, or tricked or ?? As I mentioned before, you're a good guy, super smart and I wish you peace. For me, there is a bigger picture, and believe it or not, this thread has helped fill in some of the cracks for me. Some. But there is a vast amount of "facts" that makes no sense to me. It is what it is - we live to fight another day - no casualties on RGO that I've heard of. Godspeed to all - stay safe. Cheers, bp |
|
|
|
Post by seawell on May 17, 2021 19:13:24 GMT -6
I'm basing it off the fact that the number is growing at an unusually high rate(when compared to other VAERS numbers for the flu vaccine over the past 5 years for example). So it's an ongoing situation that continually needs to be monitored. I'm of the mindset they haven't linked any deaths to the covid vaccine *yet.*. I tend to think where there's that much smoke there's fire but we'll see. I'm not saying they should stop the covid vaccine by the way, I was just surprised they suspended the 1976 vaccine for such low numbers. So for me, when you put the covid vaccine VAERS reports along with the fact that this is the quickest a vaccine has been brought to market...and....it is the first time a MRNA vaccine has been given to humans, I'm concerned. How much smoke is ~4,000/259,000,000 = 0.000017 indicative of in your view? Again, you're comparing the 1976 number of directly linked deaths to the current ~4,000 non-linked deaths. To compare the same stat from 1976 to now, you have the 53 (or whatever it was) directly linked deaths then compared to 0 directly-linked deaths now. If there were 50+ directly linked deaths to this vaccine it would absolutely be suspended. Or put another way, to compare to the ~4,000 today, you'd need to go dig up how many people died after getting the 1976 vaccine but the investigation determined it had nothing to do with the vaccine (and adjust for how many doses had been administered in each program of course). The deaths in 1976 were not known to be directly related(at least at the time they paused the vaccine campaign). They were suspected to be linked to the vaccine and were from the estimated 1 in 100,000 vaccinated that developed Guillain–Barré. The reason there is enough smoke now in my view is that the VAERS reports of deaths from flu vaccine over the past 5 years combined is only 119. So, in light of that the covid VAERS numbers are concerning to me. Outside of anaphylaxis, any death related to a vaccine is going to happen some time after and it's going to take time for patterns(if there are any) to reveal themselves. |
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on May 17, 2021 19:55:41 GMT -6
Hey Bill, if I have insulted you, low key or otherwise, please forgive me. It absolutely wasn’t intentional.
|
|
|
|
Post by matt@IAA on May 17, 2021 20:09:52 GMT -6
seawell I believe the difference is the timeline of the reporting requirements under the FDA emergency use authorization. I know that anyone who has been vaccinated for COVID and dies for any reason is required to be reported to VAERS. I don’t think there is a timeline right now, so anyone who died for any reason at any point after the vaccine goes into the database by law. For the flu it’s only within 7 days unless it’s GBS, then it’s 42 days. vaers.hhs.gov/docs/VAERS_Table_of_Reportable_Events_Following_Vaccination.pdf
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 17, 2021 20:49:53 GMT -6
You guys realize this thread will lead nowhere and solve nothing, right?
|
|
|
|
Post by ragan on May 17, 2021 21:58:49 GMT -6
You guys realize this thread will lead nowhere and solve nothing, right? Well shit, I mean, that describes about half the stuff I've ever done |
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 17, 2021 22:27:29 GMT -6
I guess I'm just waiting for the dueling reported threads from the two sides. lol
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnkenn on May 17, 2021 22:28:05 GMT -6
|
|
They are numbers and you can make em say what you want if you're smarter than the next guy, or that guy doesn't have the time to bend em back the other way. 
